Current time: Thursday, May 8, 2025, 18:10 (UTC) Number of articles on English Wikipedia: 6,991,414

Archive
Archives

Dr. José Miró Cardona

What can I do to properly use the photo in the José Miró Cardona article? I thought that I uploaded properly, or at least in accordance with other TIME covers used. I was going to add it again, but I'll wait for your response.

Order of Canada

Just wanted to say good job removing the list of member on the Order of Canada page. It was just getting crazy. In a related note I visited La Citadelle the other day and got to hold a Companion badge they have on display, but unfortunately photos are not allowed inside the residence, so no pd image of the insignia (although I really think that those images on the medals.org.uk page probably originated from Library and Archives Canada, but there images are currently broken links :( Hope everything is going well --Dowew 23:28, 17 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. While it is good we know where we can find the insignia, I think we are fine, since we are using the insignia under the fair use. There are a lot of other Canadians I can poke and prod and see if we can get free photos. But as for everything else, it is fine here. Just getting SVG Canadian flags done. I am glad that the Order article is being prunned, it really needs it. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:44, 17 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hydnjo's response to the blocking proposal

I thank one and all - Jarandal, Antandrus, Titoxd, Xaosflux, TenOfAllTrades, mboverload, PseudoSudo, Knowledge Seeker, Haukurth, Deathphoenix, Zzyzx11, Tyrenius, Zscout370, AnnH, Rick Block, Tyrenius (again), Zscout370 (again) and NoSeptember for your support.

To Jeffrey O. Gustafson who initiated this block request I ask why? We have had no interaction until now so how do you come to this requested action at WP:AN? Did you come across my account during your own research or are you acting as a proxy for another admin/user with whom I've caused to be angry with me? In reviewing your contributions I see no such "letter of the law" before now and so I feel singled out by you and I have no clue as to why - that to me is most disturbing. If you've come to this action on your own then should I be always wary of another admin challenging the legitimacy of my account?

For TenOfAllTrades who advised me not to worry and Rick who made me laugh I give special thanks, you've helped me to not take this so personally. And to Jeff, thanks for being courteous in informing me of your action and for letting me feel that your heart wasn't for blocking me.
Except for my one explanation above, I haven't edited for a few days now so as to allow y'all to comment about this based on my history of contribution rather than my reaction to it.

I wanted to say all of this before it all goes to archive heaven. I still have a lingering concern that this may arise again and don't want to go through WP life looking over my shoulder or worrying that I might piss-off some admin and cause another inquiry about the legitimacy of my account. If any of you who have been so gracious as to take the time to support me here have any suggestions to prevent such an action, please drop your thoughts on my talk or by email.

Finally, on a personal note to all, I never ever expected so much supportive response from all of you. I know that I've been moody at times and have spoken in ways that I have regretted the next day. I hoped otherwise but it seemed that those unfortunate responses might end up being my legacy as they were the foremost in my mind. And so far as this being a "role account", I think that I'll let the descriptions of AnnH and NoSeptember (both above) stand as the most intuitive descriptions of this account. My (and our) warmest regards to all of you for your understanding and outward support for the continuation of hydnjo's user account and future contributions. Again, my delighted and humble thanks :-) --hydnjo talk 02:03, 18 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

addendum: Jeff, I was confused at the outset in that I wasn't aware of the "role account" policy and then after becoming aware I was frustrated that I had made so many edits which could mislead someone to the conclusion that my account was a role account. I'm sorry that in my zeal to understand your actions that I posed the possibility that you were acting at someone else's behest. I have no evidence of that and it was improper of me to even mention that such a bizarre conspiracy was possible. I find myself guilty of "blaming the messenger" and posting an inappropriate comment about your motivation.

As for my account, I want to state that it is not a role account and I apologize for leaving the impression that it is one. "hydnjo" is the signature that I commonly use for much of my correspondence and thought it to be appropriate when I first started my WP account. The portmanteau is an acknowledgment of our shared existence and not an indication that Heidi and I share in editing at WP.

I thank you for your courtesy in informing me at the outset of the discussion at WP:AN and for your compliments about my contributions. The comments in my response were made in the shadow of my own frustration with my having left a trail of edits that could easily be construed as having come from either Heidi or myself. I sincerely apologize to you for making any suggestion as to your motivation in bringing up a legitimate policy question. You have a genuine concern for the orderly behavior of our editors and I thank you for initiating this discussion and providing me the opportunity to explain the nature of my account. --hydnjo talk 19:05, 18 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Your welcome. You're good people to have on WP, and while I might not have worked with you both on any articles, I still believe the actions that some wanted to persue against you were misplaced and just a little understanding later, everyone is fine and no one got blocked. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 03:27, 18 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Chat

I see that you're deleting flag images right and left from the Flags of Puerto Rico article (maybe we should safe some time and delete the whole article while we are at it (smile)). It would be nice to have the 1873 Spanish colonial Flag, since it is a historical flag. Can you come up with something? Any ideas? I mean pretty soon the article is going to be left without any flags and is goping to be useless. Take care. Tony the Marine 21:10, 21 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

I know you want to use various flags of Puerto Rico, and that is one goal that I commend, but the problem is that many of the flag images that you have uploaded in the past, they are coming from sources that do not want their flags images to be used. What I can suggest is that we merge this article with Flag of Puerto Rico and keep the flags that are freely licensed, then link to both FOTW and Vexilla Mundi, but not upload the images here. How does that sound? User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 21:26, 21 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
    • I like your idea. I only have one request. Instead of adding a "merge tag" I would like it if you worked on it when ever you find the time. You see I like your style and I've grown to trust your judgement completely. I'm glad that you didn't feel offended with my message above because I was only kidding with you (As my Italian ancestors would say "I was busting your Chops" (smile)). How does that sound? Tony the Marine 00:23, 22 July 2006 (UTC)Reply


I like it! I didn't think you were picking on me, really. I've seen you're work before and I even had the pleasure of talking with you on this talk page. I know that you and me, we're always "cool". JUST DON'T MESS AROUND NO MORE! (just joking). Tony the Marine 01:02, 22 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

I am not going to delete the flags now, I am going to double check them again before I press the delete button. The only thing I deleted is the talk page of the Flags... page since all it contained was a template about the PR Wikiproject. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:04, 22 July 2006 (UTC)Reply


Estonian flags

Thank you for your offer. If you have the copyright of those images, why would'nt you upload them yourself? I think they might be useful. And it would be better to upload them directly to Commons. Then you can use them in the English Wikipedia article Estonian flag. Andres 18:19, 22 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

I own the copyright, so I will upload myself in a few hours. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 18:30, 22 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Forgive me if I'm stupid, but that above sentence seems like you're going to upload yourself to Commons. ;) --Terrancommander 17:04, 23 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Libya

I know it's VERY uncommon to ask for awards but I really think I deserve this. I've worked incredibly hard on Libya and have developed it from little more than a stub to featured article.

:)

--Jaw101ie 18:29, 23 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Deleted flags

Hi, two of the flags thatshould be on Gallery_of_flags_based_on_British_ensigns have been deleted by you. Would it be possible to update the pge with the curent most appropriate images (my vexillolgy is non-existant). Rich Farmbrough 19:29 24 July 2006 (GMT).

I will probably get that Quebec flag done soon and others are working on the British High Commissioner flag. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 19:36, 24 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Assistance needed

Could you please help convert this flag and this flag (the latter of which was uploaded to image:Macau flag.gif, intentionally made disused [1] and was not restored dispite warning [2]) to replace the existing inaccurate ones at image:flag of Hong Kong.svg and image:flag of Macau.svg? Thanks in advance. — Instantnood 20:17, 24 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

What I have done is I measured the specifics of the flagd and made minor changes. Other than that, I could not much else, since it looks correct. The only major ting I did with the Macau flag is that I resized the central emblem a little bit, then put it to scale. I hope that helps. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 21:04, 24 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Thanks so much. Meanwhile I'm curious to know what you've actually done with the Hong Kong flag. — Instantnood 21:53, 31 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
I mainly checked the height and width of the emblem on the official image, them comparied it with the SVG image. Made the minor changes and that is about it. There was nothing else that I could think of; other than suggesting to get the EPS image, convert it to SVG, then upload it. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 21:57, 31 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Thank you very much. — Instantnood 22:00, 31 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Image:Class 171-cab.jpg

It has been determined on two separate occasions that the license for this image is acceptable for inclusion on Wikipedia, at least one of which was after the cut-off date. Please check the history of the image page and IfD. Thryduulf 21:25, 24 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Ok. I will still look, but im my honest opinion, I find this license quite strange. I will not press the issue futher, but my opinion that it should (not have to) change. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 21:33, 24 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Hmm, I hadn't thought of it that way (I hadn't seen SPUI's comment when I posted at PUI last night). I will think about it and reply later, probably at PUI or the image talk. Thryduulf 08:58, 25 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )

Hullo. While I do agree that masses upon masses of undiscussed page moves are bad, and I do agree that this user seems, err, unrepentant, would it be remiss if I made three complaints in a more general sense?

It always looks bad when one admin says "If you do (blah) again you'll be blocked" and another admin blocks the person before they do (blah) again. It also looks bad when an indefinate block gets applied without a note being placed on the user's talk page saying it's been done. And finally, even if we don't have anything to say to a disruptive user, it looks bad to come right out and say so.

All that being said: I'm mostly a pain in the arse, I support the block, and bloody oath I'm thankful that it was you who reverted all those moves and not me.

brenneman {L} 05:56, 25 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Look, I wanted to be brief to him, since I am at the pont where I want to kick his ass. I noted the block at AN/I, and he was warned twice not to do it, but Zoe pointed out that if he was reverted, despite being told not to move, he would have moved back anyways and cause a move war. And moving 800+ pages is something that just cannot be ignored. IMHO, it is ban worthy, though I have blocked the user on here before and on the Commons for copyvios. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:00, 25 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
  • The above user has contacted the blocking list. Could you please advise me of the background?Capitalistroadster 06:38, 25 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
    • He was perfroming page moves, but the page moves were contested by Zoe. Zoe, going on Richard's talk page, advised him to not make any moves again. Richard said he would continue, so Zoe warned him again, this time saying that he would be blocked if he moved again. I saw a posting at AN/I that he had performed these page moves and requested for assistance. After looking at the scope of the page moves, he did over 800 of them in the span of a few days. So, after reverting a few, I blocked the user indefinitely and I have begun to revert the last 200 or so page moves. There is a thread now at WP:AN/I supporting the indef block, supporting my efforts to page move. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:44, 25 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
While I agree with the block I have removed your protection of the user's talk page to allow further communication. As Aaron pointed out above, we don't help ourselves by escalating the antagonism... and 'wanting to kick some ass' is exactly the attitude admins should never take. This user is one of those people who makes massive surges of changes all at once - which is either a great thing or a terrible thing depending on the nature of the changes. If discussion can bring them around to agreeing to discuss such mass adjustments / hold off if there are concerns in the future then they should be unblocked. If not then the block should stay. But shutting down communication / antagonizing them is just a good way to create a new mass vandal. --CBD 12:22, 26 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

NEW SHINY AWARD YAY

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Thanks --mboverload@ 22:17, 25 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

A N Hornby

I guess you did a blind revert of Richard Norton's edits but the one that he made here was correct. The A. N. Hornby is the standard format followed in all cricket biography articles. Can you please move it back to A. N. Hornby. tia, Tintin (talk) 15:24, 26 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Fixed. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 17:24, 26 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Thanks. Tintin (talk) 08:21, 27 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )

Your block has been under discussion in a number of places. I would like your help in two areas.

First of all, I would urge you to shorten the block to a suitable time, for example 30 or 60 days. This should provide ample opportunity for discussion of the most appropriate duration and would avoid the inflammatory effect that a block perceived to be permanent has.

Second of all, I have concerns about some of the mechanics of the block. Others have raised these as well. I am concerned about the precedent this might set if something isn't done fairly quickly to repudiate certain procedural points. I would prefer to discuss these with you in detail privately and suggest you contact me via email if you're willing to do this. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 15:20, 27 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Norton has made me a promise to perform no more page moves for a period of 90 days. In return, I have unblocked him and hope that this will facilitiate a more permanent understanding that is acceptable to everyone. Please direct discussion regarding the unblock to Norton's talk page. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 16:13, 27 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Fine. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 17:27, 27 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Problem with LeBlanc flag SVG

Zach, It appears that there is a problem with the SVG of GG LeBlanc's flag. See the the talk page of the SVG for more. - Thanks, Hoshie |   06:20, 28 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Image:Flag of the Royal Military College of Canada.svg

You could have uploaded it to commons so the other projects could have used it too... ? feydey 02:47, 31 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

I could have, but I wanted to make sure ya'll like the image before I send it there. It is easier for me to correct it here than at the Commons. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 03:06, 31 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Ok then, can You mention the source for the SVG flag. As I looked, it is somewhat different than Image:Rmc flag.jpg. feydey 03:15, 31 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
I traced, by hand, the crest of the college, which is currently different from the flag. The crest is from the Canadian DND. The St. Edward's crown came from one of our SVG images. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 04:31, 31 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Added source. There are several different designs for the crest and the flag online, but I went ahead with the current crest, unless told otherwise. FOTW at least as two designs of the flag. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 04:39, 31 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
 
Here's a cup of coffee, relax, take deep breaths and drink. The flags will wait. feydey 06:30, 31 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, we got plenty of images, now is time to think of the text, hmmmm. feydey 06:46, 31 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

I made Flag of Mexico and Flag of Belarus to FA, so pretty much, you have good company in the flag department. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:47, 31 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Well Flag of Canada won't be so easy ;) And all that red there is starting to burn my eyes already... --feydey 06:56, 31 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Damn right is's going to be easy. If there is one government that is very open about their flag, it would be Canada, hands down. Who else gives out freebie flags on national holidays and special occasions. Ain't the US, ain't the UK; it's Canada! I got books, I got contacts, and no expense will be spared to make this article an FA. Red links? No problem. Those will be nuked or filled. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:58, 31 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

About changing those sector variables to z-sector

 
I, mboverload hereby award you a barnstar for just being a cool editor and admin. Homies 4 life =D --mboverload@ 22:06, 31 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Editor's Barnstar

 
The Editor's Barnstar

I award Zscout this barnstar for his efforts in deleting thousands of pieces of unworthy content from Wikipedia.Blnguyen | rant-line 02:00, 3 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Wow...Thank you both. *bows* User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:03, 3 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Police school

LOL! Perhaps you hadn't noticed the image description, but it's not really related to Poland. The name of the image should be broken down onto Polis-hog-skolan.jpg, meaning Police Academy in... Swedish. Perhaps you could ask one of the Swedish wikipedians, certainly they would be more knowledgeable about police schools in their country :) //Halibutt 06:55, 3 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Oops. I'll do that now. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:56, 3 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Image:Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi (stamp).jpg

Hi, I'm having a little dispute over the licensing of Image:Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi (stamp).jpg at Commons. This image is a stamp issued by the USSR in 1983. According to the Russian copyright law "State emblems and official signs (flags, armorial bearings, decorations, monetary signs and other State symbols and official signs)" are not protected by copyright (commons:Template:PD-RU-exempt). The other user disputed that "state signs" covered postage stamps. The Urkranian copyright law (which would also be a copyright holder) explictly states that postage stamps are "state signs" (commons:Commons:Stamps/Public ___domain). Do you have any opinion on this situation or know where I should take this dispute? Cheers, R. Koot 22:34, 3 August 2006 (UTC)Reply